If this is the kind of lawyer Harvard is turning out, it could be time to close up shop in Cambridge . . .
CNN legal analyst and Harvard Law alum Areva Martin argued this morning that Stormy Daniels is not bound by her agreement with Michael Cohen not to discuss her alleged affair with Donald Trump, because Trump, per his statement of yesterday, was unaware that Cohen had paid Stormy $130,000.
Martin’s reasoning was so transparently flawed that co-host Alisyn Camerota had no trouble demolishing it:
“They never said that the agreement was with Donald Trump. I mean, Michael Cohen has said the agreement was just with Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels and the President didn’t know anything about it. So the president saying, I didn’t know anything about it, confirms . . . what Michael Cohen has been saying: he didn’t know anything about it.”
Note: It’s one thing for Stormy’s lawyer to argue that Trump being unaware of the payment nullifies the contract. He’s an advocate, paid to make assertions on behalf of his client, even if they are of dubious legal merit. But CNN casts Areva Martin not as an advocate but as a “legal analyst.” In that role, she should be expected to offer sound, objective analysis, not advocacy that doesn’t pass the straight-face test.